The newspaper analyzed salary, overtime and other compensation paid to each of the city's 12,000 full-time, part-time and seasonal workers. The data, obtained through a California Public Records Act request, showed:

About 80 percent of city employees took home more money in 2008 than the previous year.

The proportion and number of city employees making at least $100,000 have almost tripled in the past six years. Thirteen percent of the payroll is in this top category.

Last year's $41 million boost in payroll was more than the increases of the past four years added together. It was equivalent to the city giving an additional $3,400 to each employee.

The mayor's office calls the increase “an aberration” due to factors that include the labor settlements, union contracts negotiated by the previous administration and a pay raise Sanders supported for public safety employees.

Still, it helps put into perspective the $43 million in wage and benefit reductions that will take effect July 1 to address a budget gap. Sanders portrays the 6 percent reductions as historic and difficult, yet the savings are about the same as last year's increase in payroll.

Throughout his three years as mayor, Sanders has trumpeted “tough fiscal discipline.”

“I'd like nothing more than to be able to recognize their (employees') hard work with a pay increase,” Sanders said at a news conference last year after butting heads with labor unions in negotiations. “But as your mayor, my first and only allegiance must be to the taxpayers and improving our city's financial health.”

The message was clear: The vast majority of city employees would have to forgo salary increases.

Across-the-board raises were held at bay for some employees, but the newspaper found thousands received pay hikes, merit increases, special payouts, union settlements and unusual cashed-out health and vacation benefits.

Sanders did not grant interview requests for more than two weeks, and then held a news conference Thursday to say payroll expenses have fallen during his time in office.

“I think we've done a great job,” he said in an interview afterward. “The fact that we're down now below the first year that I took office, given inflation and given pay raises, I think means that we're controlling those costs.”

The newspaper's analysis initially surprised senior city officials and union leaders. “It seems crazy,” Scott Chadwick, the city's chief labor negotiator, said of the newspaper's finding that close to 1,000 employees received pay increases of 10 percent or more.

Several union leaders were in disbelief when told the payroll grew by 6 percent, and that dozens of employees had increases of 30 percent or more in total compensation.

They were apparently not considering all the ways pay can increase every year: merit increases, promotions, overtime and step increases – which give employees more money as they gain experience.

In a subsequent interview, city officials confirmed many of the newspaper's findings, but downplayed the increases.

“I'd argue that's not a big trend,” said Marcelle Voorhies Rossman, a financial operations manager in the comptroller's office.

Rossman said officials were surprised by the numbers because they typically analyze by fiscal year, by pay period and by department. The newspaper analyzed calendar year figures because that's how the city released the payroll database.

While she acknowledged more than 1,000 employees received increases in compensation of 10 percent or more, she said the city only considered 286 of them raises. The others had circumstances such as promotions or special payouts, she said.

City officials provided a general breakdown of the remaining $30 million increase, saying $22.5 million was from union contracts, $6.5 million stemmed from overtime and nearly $1 million was unused vacation time cashed out by employees who had been terminated.

The database the city provided in response to the newspaper's request included salaries and overtime paid to each employee by name, but not details of pay categories, such as merit increases or bonuses. The city said it would charge the newspaper at least $1,900 to provide more specifics.

In interviews and data analysis, the newspaper learned other reasons for the increase in last year's $732.7 million payroll:

About 55 percent of city employees receive special payouts, called add-ons. There are more than 100 types of add-ons, and they typically compensate for additional duties, undesirable shifts or extra training. City officials would not say how much add-on expenses have changed year to year. But union contracts showed new add-ons increased or expanded payouts for police and fire personnel last year.

Promotions accounted for some of the 374 pay increases of 20 percent or more. About 5 percent of employees are promoted in any given year, said Chadwick, the city labor negotiator.

More employees took advantage of a benefit that enables them to cash out up to 3.1 weeks of unused vacation and sick time per year – an option generally allowed in the private sector only upon termination. The benefit cost the city about $5.7 million last year, a 14 percent increase from the year before.

Officials emphasize that the city must pay what the marketplace demands, or workers will look elsewhere.

“If you compare the city of San Diego to others across the state, we don't have a lot of employees who are the highest paid,” Chadwick said. “Actually, it's quite the opposite.”

Last year, the city commissioned reports to measure how its pay for police and fire personnel stacked up against about 20 cities across Southern and Central California. The reports focused on base salaries and employees'contribution to health and pension plans, and showed San Diego paying less than several other cities.

That type of analysis is problematic, experts say, because total compensation includes many components that vary widely.

Critics say it's not a question of whether the city pays more than other cities. It's whether San Diego can afford to pay what it does.

“Our elected officials are not strong enough to take on the unions,” said Peter Q. Davis, a retired bank president and former mayoral candidate. “I don't think the city draws the line and says, 'This is the maximum we can afford to pay.' ”

David Monroe, a parks manager, received one of the city's largest raises last year. His 27 percent boost in pay catapulted him into the city's fastest-growing income group, those making $100,000 or more. Monroe's pay jumped when he switched from overseeing brush management and park ranger programs to managing dozens of parks, recreation centers and city pools.

Monroe said he worked hard for the $120,700 he made last year.

“You want to see the gray hair and bags under my eyes?” Monroe said, referring to his 40-hour to 70-hour work weeks as one of the city's four deputy directors of parks and recreation. “Sheesh. It's nonstop.”

Pamela Hightower, deputy director of the personnel department, watched her pay grow 37 percent to $119,800 last year when she was promoted from a supervising personnel analyst. In her previous position, Hightower oversaw two individuals. Now she supervises about 40.

“It's a completely different level of responsibility,” Hightower said.

The data the city provided the Union-Tribune make it impossible to know an individual's circumstances.

For example, San Diego police Officer Jeff Chione said his 115 percent pay increase was overstated because he was out recovering from work-related neck surgery in 2007.

Chione's total compensation bounced from $43,600 in 2007 to $94,000 last year. While he acknowledged receiving various forms of additional pay, including $4,200 in cashed-out vacation time, Chione said the numbers only tell part of the story.

“If I got that much in a raise, I'd like to see it,” said Chione, a 15-year department veteran.

City officials say they are doing their best to pay market rates while balancing the city's budget.

But critics wonder about payroll costs that affect other benefits.

“This has a double-whammy effect,” said Richard Rider, a former mayoral candidate and chairman of San Diego Tax Fighters. “It's going to come back and gouge taxpayers again in the form of higher pensions.”